Adaptive hash index partitions not tested in MTR

Bug #1214449 reported by Laurynas Biveinis
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Percona Server moved to https://jira.percona.com/projects/PS
Invalid
Undecided
Unassigned
5.1
Invalid
Undecided
Unassigned
5.5
Fix Released
Low
Laurynas Biveinis
5.6
Invalid
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

Adaptive hash index partitions do not have a single MTR test. A basic test would be setting partitions to > 1 and running some workload with number of index trees >> AHI partitions and buffer pool size setting that would allow non-trivial amount of AHI pages. A bit more advanced test would be collecting failures, if any, from --mysqld=--innodb-adaptive-hash-index-partitions=N run to a testcase.

The bug does not apply for 5.6 but such testcases need to be created for https://blueprints.launchpad.net/percona-server/+spec/ahi-part-5-6 blueprint work.

Related branches

tags: added: ahi-partitions xtradb
Revision history for this message
Laurynas Biveinis (laurynas-biveinis) wrote :

MTR --mysqld=--innodb-adaptive-hash-index-partitions=8 run is clean: http://jenkins.percona.com/job/percona-server-5.5-param/824/

Revision history for this message
Raghavendra D Prabhu (raghavendra-prabhu) wrote :

Does this also test (innodb_buffer_pool_instances > 1) with
(innodb_adaptive_hash_index_partitions > 1), since that
particular combination has had a few bug reports earlier.

It would also be good to include this in RQG's combination
testing.

Revision history for this message
Laurynas Biveinis (laurynas-biveinis) wrote :

Raghu -

Code review tells that the number of buffer pool instances should be completely orthogonal to the number of AHI partitions. Were there any bugs that were repeatable with ibpi > 1 and not repeatable with ibpi = 1 while the number of AHI partitions was kept constant at > 1?

Re. RQG, see PQA-58 for AHI partitions and I'm asking Roel the status of ibpi > 1 testing there.

Revision history for this message
Shahriyar Rzayev (rzayev-sehriyar) wrote :

Percona now uses JIRA for bug reports so this bug report is migrated to: https://jira.percona.com/browse/PS-3007

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Related blueprints

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.